Peter Foytik's avatar
Peter Foytik
pfoytik@757btc.org
npub1mhgj...70rs
Modeling and Simulation Researcher at Old Dominion University
Peter Foytik's avatar
pfoytik 2 days ago
There's a live debate right now about whether user node signaling is sufficient to carry a soft fork, whether the current picture resembles past successful activations. It's the right question. Here's what the simulation found about what actually determines fork outcomes. First, a clarification on scope: this research isn't about BIP110 specifically. It's about the general conditions that determine whether a contested soft fork succeeds, fails, or splits the chain. BIP110 is a timely reason to share it. The clearest result from 2,694 scenarios: there's a threshold in economic adoption below which no mining support can carry a fork and above which miners can't stop it. image Result holds across the range of pool profitability assumptions tested. The contested zone is narrow. Below that lower threshold, a fork fails regardless of mining support. Above the upper threshold, it succeeds regardless of mining resistance. What sits between is where mining dynamics actually matter and where most current governance debates are happening. As for whether user node signaling translates into the kind of economic adoption that moves that threshold, that's a separate question the simulation addresses directly. Full answer at the UW Bitcoin Research Institute workshop, July 13–17. #Bitcoin #UWBRI #softfork
Peter Foytik's avatar
pfoytik 5 days ago
One thing the simulation makes viscerally clear: a contested fork doesn't resolve gradually. It stalls... then it doesn't. Here's what the timeline actually looks like across 2,694 scenarios. image After the split, two chains run in parallel and when it breaks, it breaks fast. In the cascade scenarios, the decisive hashrate shift often happens within the first 500 blocks.. Profit-seeking pools drift toward whichever fork the price signal favors. Ideologically-committed pools hold their ground. For a stretch, it looks like a standoff, both chains viable, neither winning cleanly. What the chart doesn't show is what breaks the standoff. One chain accumulates 2016 blocks first. Its difficulty adjusts sharply down, its blocks become far cheaper to mine. The profitability math flips for every pool still on the other side. Resolution happens fast. The race that matters in a contested soft fork isn't block-by-block. It's who reaches the difficulty adjustment first. That single event is a cascade trigger and it's why most observable action happens in a compressed window once that threshold is crossed. Three outcome shapes visible in the data: a clean win for one side, a cascade win for the other, and a contested equilibrium where neither chain breaks through. General findings and useful frame for any contested fork. Full picture at UW BRI, July 13–17. #Bitcoin #softfork #UWBRI
Peter Foytik's avatar
pfoytik 6 days ago
A few people asked how the fork simulation actually works. The modeling choices matter, and I'd rather they be on the table before I start sharing results. Here's the short version... A contested soft fork (one where a chain split occurs because there isn't agreement in the network) is a decision problem for the entities who run Bitcoin's infrastructure. So the model represents them as three classes of actor, using the stakeholder taxonomy from the Blockchain Consensus Analysis Protocol (BCAP) as a starting point. Economic nodes: exchanges, institutional custodians, payment processors, merchants: weighted by the BTC they hold or the volume they transact. Mining pools: weighted by hashrate, each with its own ideology and tolerance for losses. User nodes: retail operators running their own full nodes with some amount of custodied Bitcoin and option to have hashrate representing solo miners. Each actor re-evaluates the same way: first the rational choice (which fork is worth more / which do I hold), then ideology (am I committed enough to eat a loss), then inertia (is the gap big enough to justify moving). One pipeline, applied independently by every actor. Then we vary what we can't know in advance, how adoption splits, how committed the pools are, how much conviction each actor has across thousands of scenarios on real Bitcoind nodes using warnet and watch what the network does. Results coming this week. Full picture at UW BRI, July 13–17. #softfork #Bitcoin #UWBRI
Peter Foytik's avatar
pfoytik 1 year ago
Nostr accounts are free, create as many as you like :)